Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Performing Arts Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Simsbury staff say Performing Arts Center needs referendum after cost increases; PAC fundraising falls short of target
Summary
Town staff told the Board of Finance the Performing Arts Center project has grown past a referendum threshold; the PAC has raised about $904,000 but questions remain about contingency, town contribution and timeline for a January–February vote.
Town staff told the Board of Finance on Oct. 21 that the Performing Arts Center project will require a public referendum because the total project cost now exceeds the town's referendum threshold.
The town's discussion focused on how much contingency to include, whether private fundraising can close the gap and how quickly the town must act to meet schedule goals. A town staff member said the PAC (the nonprofit operating partner) has raised about $904,000 but indicated that figure was still short of the private commitment the project team expected.
Town counsel noted that “expenditure appropriations are permissive,” summarizing legal limits on how appropriations are presented and spent. Staff said some of the additional dollars being requested are contingency funds; they emphasized that contingency would be returned if not needed. Officials said the town expects to place the question before voters in a special referendum likely scheduled for January or February and that a separate public hearing on financing is expected as part of the referendum process.
Staff described two paths discussed internally: a riskier approach that attempted to keep the budget at previous totals by deferring or value-engineering items, and a more conservative approach that builds in contingency to avoid future operating or capital shortfalls. Multiple staff and stakeholders — including the PAC and the first selectman's office — participated in a multi-hour review of options and concluded the conservative path was the preferred approach.
On financing mechanics, board members asked about creative repayment options if the PAC could share operating revenue (for example, a small per-ticket surcharge). Staff said the PAC has shifted some private giving from operating to capital in order to meet a capital fundraising target and that that shift has put pressure on the PAC’s operating budget and future programming capacity.
Staff also said the town negotiated a short extension on a related closing for the 2 Farms Village project to Nov. 15 because Phase 1 construction work must be completed before closing, and that contractors' schedules could push some final punch-list items into late November or early December.
Why it matters: placing a capital project before voters will set the timeline and financing approach for a major town facility. The discussion shows officials are weighing voter appetite, the town's exposure if private fundraising comes up short, and scheduling constraints tied to summer and fall opening targets.
What’s next: staff said they will continue to meet with the PAC on possible private contributions, finalize contingency and scope decisions, and prepare a referendum timeline and public hearing schedule for the Selectmen and Board of Finance to review.
